1991: Navy Intelligence is presented with the “Manthorpe Curve“, which predicted a post-Cold War “Global Threat” that trended upwards alongside ROW challenges. (Note: “ROW’ is defined as rest-of-world). In the curve graph, the year 2000 is between “Near-Term Program Planning” and “Mid-Term Strategic Planning.

1996: Major non-NATO allies (MNNA) received additional military and financial benefits when section 2321k was added to Title 22 (Foreign Relations) of the U.S. Code (also known as section 517 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961), which added MNNAs to many of the same exemptions from the Arms Export Control Act that were enjoyed by NATO members. It also authorized the President to designate a nation as an MNNA thirty days after notifying Congress. When enacted, the statute designated Australia, Egypt, Israel, Japan, Jordan, New Zealand, and South Korea as major non-NATO allies.

September 13, 2001: Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) publishes ‘This goes beyond Bin Laden’, calling for America to specifically attack Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Syria, Sudan, the Palestinian Authority, Libya, Algeria, Saudi Arabia and Egypt for allegations of ‘harboring, training, and supporting terrorists’. JINSA also asserted that the United States must do the following in response to the 9/11 attacks: Halt all US purchases of Iraqi oil under the UN Oil for Food Program and to provide all necessary support to the Iraq National Congress, including direct American military support, to effect a regime change in Iraq; Bomb identified terrorist training camps and facilities in any country harboring terrorists. Interdict the supply lines to terrorist organizations, including but not limited to those between Damascus and Beirut that permit Iran to use Lebanon as a terrorist base; Revoke the Presidential Order banning assassinations; Overturn the 1995 CIA Directive limiting whom the U.S. can recruit to aid counter-terrorism in an effort to boost our human intelligence; Freeze the bank accounts of organizations in the US that have links to terrorism-supporting groups and their political wings. Ask other countries and financial institutions to do the same; Demand that Egypt and Saudi Arabia sever all remaining ties with Osama Bin Laden, including ties with Saudi-sponsored nongovernmental organizations and groups abroad that raise money for Bin Laden and other terrorist organizations; Suspend US Military Aid to Egypt while re-evaluating Egypt’s support for American policy objectives, and re-evaluate America’s security relationship with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States unless both actually join in our war against terrorism; Ensure that American technology, arms, technical support and personnel are not supplied to countries that do not fully support American objectives regarding terrorism, and through which terrorists might acquire American materiel. Ask our allies and other countries to undertake similar restrictions; Reassess the visa process by which nationals from hostile nations are permitted to enter the United States. And tighten controls at the Canadian and Mexican borders to prevent access by people without appropriate documentation; Strengthen American law enforcement efforts to identify and eliminate terrorist cells operating in the United States; Take immediate steps to reduce America’s dependence on foreign oil. (Note: Instead of serving as an advisory panel to the U.S. government, JINSA admits being a mouthpiece for Israel in “our” War against Terrorism, a mere three days after 9/11 all the ‘expertise’ of the Jewish State is curiously ready to go in guiding U.S. ‘counterterrorism’ policies this moment onward).

2004: Earliest coinage of the term “Shia Crescent“, it specifically refers to the Shia majority countries Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Iran and Bahrain. It was named after Iran had gained geopolitical influence over Iraq following the invasion by American forces in 2003, with the local Iraqi environment in dire straights, Iran’s political, military and religious sphere of influence took the opportunity to expand themselves accordingly in Saddam Hussein’s secularist/Baathist absence over the region.

April 23, 2006: Ann Scott Tyson publishes “New Plans Foresee Fighting Terrorism Beyond War Zones” wherein, quote: “A third plan sets out how the military can both disrupt and respond to another major terrorist strike on the United States. It includes lengthy annexes that offer a menu of options for the military to retaliate quickly against specific terrorist groups, individuals or state sponsors depending on who is believed to be behind an attack. Another attack could create both a justification and an opportunity that is lacking today to retaliate against some known targets, according to current and former defense officials familiar with the plan. This plan details “what terrorists or bad guys we would hit if the gloves came off. The gloves are not off,” said one official, who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject.” Contingency plans to pre-emptively target specific countries after a “2nd 9/11” have been in motion consistency over the years, alongside internal developments of security theater inside the United States itself.